Abstract
The knowledge of the philosopher-king, as defined in the Republic V. 475e-480a, is the knowledge of to 6v : concerning to μη ον we cannot have anything but ignorance, and αμα οντα τε και μη οντα are the objects of belief. By το ον Plato means the Form, and by αμα οντα τε και μη οντα the particular things and acts in this world. They are the imperfect copies of Forms. The process of the argument in 475e-480a makes it clear that they are the imperfect copies of Forms not only in their perfect nature but also in their perfect reality; the particulars in this world have only imperfect degrees of reality. Now the Form of the Good is the ultimate ground of the reality and cognition of all beings. Then the degrees of reality of them and the clarity (i.e. the degrees of truth) of their cognition are in proportion to their distance from the Form of the Good. Therefore, concerning αμα οντα και μη οντα there cannot be any cognition clearer than belief. For this reason, in ruling his state in the realm of αμα οντα τε και μη οντα, the philosopher-king has only the belief of affairs of the state, though he has knowledge of the Forms. In this respect it makes no difference whether the ruler is a philosopher or not. The strength of the rule of the philosopher-king lies in his knowledge of the Forms as the paradigm: he should mould the state on the paradigm and drag the many (οι πολλοι) away from the realm of αμα οντα τε και μη οντα up to the realm of the Forms. According to Plato's view of the many, however, their nature is not strong enough to ascend into the realm of the Forms. Then, in spite of his knowledge of the paradigm, the rule of the philosopher-king remains in the realm of αμα οντα τε και μη οντα. We can see from the argument above that the rule of the philosopher-king can be realized to the full only in the state in the soul of the man whose nature is strong enough to ascend into the realm of the Forms, i.e. only in the state in the philosopher's soul. We should take the doctrine of the philosopher-king to be the doctrine of the soul rather than the doctrine of the state.
